The Library
Critical appraisal of published systematic reviews assessing the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine studies
Tools
Mistry, Hema, Garnvwa, Hyeladzira and Oppong, Raymond (2014) Critical appraisal of published systematic reviews assessing the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine studies. Telemedicine and e-Health, Volume 20 (Number 7). pp. 609-618. doi:10.1089/tmj.2013.0259 ISSN 1530-5627.
Research output not available from this repository.
Request-a-Copy directly from author or use local Library Get it For Me service.
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2013.0259
Abstract
Background: Over the last 10 years several systematic reviews have been published on the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine studies. Most reviews have concluded that there is not much difference in the cost-effectiveness when delivering health services via telemedicine or by conventional means. We are not aware of any systematic review looking at the systematic reviews of cost-effectiveness of telemedicine. This study was designed to identify published systematic reviews on the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine studies and to undertake a quality assessment of the identified systematic reviews. Materials and Methods: We searched six electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, combining “review” terms with “telemedicine” terms to identify systematic reviews. Results: We identified 4,116 potential abstracts. Nine systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, which looked at the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine in general. All reviews were similar in terms of their stated purpose, and the objectives were clear. Three of the reviews did not use a checklist for the economic evaluation studies included in their review. The quality assessment found that five of the nine reviews had minimal flaws. Conclusions: Even though the general quality of reporting of the reviews was fine, we have found that conclusions cannot be drawn on the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine applications based on the methodological flaws in the economic analysis of the studies included in the reviews. Over time, reporting of cost-effectiveness has generally improved; however, there is still room for improvement, and authors need to use the recommended checklists for economic evaluations.
Item Type: | Journal Article | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Divisions: | Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences > Population, Evidence & Technologies (PET) > Warwick Evidence Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School |
||||||||||
Journal or Publication Title: | Telemedicine and e-Health | ||||||||||
Publisher: | Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Publishers | ||||||||||
ISSN: | 1530-5627 | ||||||||||
Official Date: | 27 June 2014 | ||||||||||
Dates: |
|
||||||||||
Volume: | Volume 20 | ||||||||||
Number: | Number 7 | ||||||||||
Page Range: | pp. 609-618 | ||||||||||
DOI: | 10.1089/tmj.2013.0259 | ||||||||||
Status: | Peer Reviewed | ||||||||||
Publication Status: | Published | ||||||||||
Access rights to Published version: | Restricted or Subscription Access |
Request changes or add full text files to a record
Repository staff actions (login required)
View Item |